2. Universities have a million and one ways to fsck you up, whether or not you win in court. This website is not worth your whole rest of life. I hven't done many things I regret in my life. I didn't get a girl pregnant when I was 15, I didn't blow two fingers off my hand fucking around with pipe bombs, I haven't been arrested for assaulting anyone in a drunken rage a, I didn't crash my dad's car (much).
The things I do regret all belong to the same class: caving in when I should have stood up for what I believe in. Therefore, I would urge ttyp0 to consider not only what the present looks like now, but also how it's going to look seen from the future. Are you going to be able to look back and say you did the right thing? Perhaps more importantly: will you care? It all depends on what kind of person you are. --
Use Alt-L to bring up the Open Page dialog, in which you can paste the URL with Ctrl-Insert.
Alternatively, paste the URL leftmost in the Location field and press Ctrl-K to kill to eol, which gets rid of the old url (the cursor will be in the right place).
Note that I'm absolutely not trying to downplay the problems with Linux's "select'n'paste" method. --
This has even less to do with the curreny discussion, but the plasma rifle is back in Quake 3 and quite possibly, when this poster said Quake, he meant Quake 3 just like when I say Quake, I actually mean Quake 2. --
I don't much like that idea. Somebody might want to send you a legitimate email to the address given here and you wouldn't read it for several days. Also, eventually, your business and personal addresses will leak out and you'll have three accounts, each getting both real email and spam.
But hey, at least you've implemented something that helps. I can't say the same about myself and my proposed method, which is:
Reject mail from unknown senders and mail back instructions on how to become a known sender. Those are simple and involve resending the mail with something added or replying to the reject notice. It isn't meant to be cracker proof, it's just to eliminate mass mailers.
I haven't done this because I don't want to annoy my correspondents, but if spam starts to annoy me too much (I actually don't get much spam), then I'll figure having each person jump through one hoop to email me isn't that big a cost. --
I keep hearing the same drivel over and over from the d.net camp so it's only fair that you get to hear my drivel over again.
If a company tries to sell a Slashdotter a closed-source encryption package, it doesn't get very far. The reader knows that if the package has holes that could be exploited by reading the source code, then the package has holes that can be exploited by reading a disassembly.
Why can't the/. readership apply the same logic to d.net as they apply to everything else? Is d.net somehow excempt?
If you couldn't be "confident in the return packets" if the full client source were released, then the only way you can be confident now is if you're deluding yourself.
I'll probably get flamed just like the last time I dared voice a negative opinion about d.net, but fuck it. If you're inconsistent while flaming me, the flames only make me stronger.
To prevent misunderstandings, let me state the nature of the holes I'm talking about. I'm not talking about running the d.net client compromising my security by it sending my passwd file to d.net or something like that. I'm talking about vulnerabilities that destroy our confidence in the results of the key tests.
Perhaps I just have the wrong take on the whole thing. I've been viewing d.net as an experiment and exercise in making trustworthy machines out of a mix of trustworthy and untrustworthy parts. But I believe this is one of the goals of the d.net project and that I'm not just pulling this out of my ass. It is not true that the d.net system is just a system for collecting a $10,000 prize and proving the need for longer keys to the US govt, whichever haphazard gum-and-shoestring method it takes.
I'm with grandma on this one: If you can't do it properly, you might as well not do it. --
If it ever becomes totally mainstream, there'll probably be a whole lot of "hardcore" Linux users that will jump ship to *BSD or Plan9, or something less mainstream.
I think you're wrong. I can only speak for myself, but I don't care all that much about Linux per se. I care about the freedom and quality of the software. Any OS that provides an acceptable level of both will do. But if Linux becomes mainstream, the mainstream OS will be free and high-quality, so why not stay in the maintream?
Well, actually, I can imagine a reason: revolutionary advances in OS design. If a large body of Linux users, from home users to businesses to governments depends on Linux as it was at some point in time, it'll be difficult for Linux to incorporate revolutionary ideas and shed backward compatibility. Then again, I can just as easily imagine such backward-incompatible changes being made in one branch of the kernel and an old branch being maintained forever to support legacy apps. --
This is probably all a misunderstanding. I interpreted "I find it really weird that you believe radiation in the brain might not cause memory loss, but yet you believe that adding milk will." as "I find it really weird that you believe radiation in the brain could not cause memory loss, but yet you believe that adding milk will." --
Certainly. However, you attributed to ddwalker some beliefs that he did not state, but could be inferred from what he said by an invalid, but commonly used, form of reasoning. --
I find it really weird that when someone questions the methods used in a study, they are often accused of believing the opposite of what the study's results show. --
People should know that there was a security flaw, even if they only hear about it after it's been fixed. You could even say that it's *more* important to spread the word about a company's feeble security measures than it is to plug the hole because it decreases the chances that people will trust the company in the future and if this happens a lot, people shouldn't trust the comany. If reports about the hole only come out after it's fixed, then there aren't any sensational news items and there isn't any public outcry against and mockery of the company involved. This means that a compny that may well deserve to look bad avoids much of the fallout. That is, you could say that if it hadn't been shown over and over again that laughable security practices never really hurt the company responsible even when they are exposed. --
It crashes a lot for a lot of people (yeah, I know it runs ok for some people; that's not enough)
The back button usually doesn't take you to the right part of the page. This has caused me to develop a strange browsing style that relies heavily on "open link in new window".
After selecting from a drop-down box, it won't accept keystrokes until you focus on another window and then on netscape again.
These are real problems and I consider them big ones because they annoy the hell out of me. There are other annoyances, but they're minor. If these three things were cleared up, I'd consider netscape a decent browser. I define a decent product as one that doesn't necessarily impress me, but does what it claims to without annoying me. --
I have to disagree with you on the cut and paste thing. I'm on google.com and my search didn't pan out too well. Ok, I'll try altavista. I select the text in the search field, go to altavista in the same window, middle click in the search field and what happens? The same thing that was in the box in Kentucky Fried Movie: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Oh well, I can just type in the same text all over again.
Now, I've finally found a working url to q3test 1.08. I've used "copy link location" in Netscape's rmb menu to get the url into the clipboard and I'm going to paste it into a wget command line. Now, I'm going to be doing some X development and I'm afraid I'm going to crash X so I'll need to run wget under nohup in an xterm or in the console. I want to watch the download progress so I'll do it in the console. CTRL-ALT-F3, type "wget ", middle click. What happens? Some shit I selected in the console earlier and contains a load of newlines is pasted, causing wget to try download some garbage and the string "rm -rf/" (that happened to be leftmost on the screen in the garbage I had pasted earlier (presumably a copy of some haX0r digest)) to be executed as a command.
Fortunately I'm not one of those lesser beings that do everything as root.
Incidentally, the reason I'd selected that block of text is that I wanted to paste it into jed, running in another console. Guess what. That didn't work either!
BTW, what are the universal cut, copy, and paste keypresses that work in almost all programs, X or console? What is the ubiquitous method of selecting text with the keyboard?
"Cut and paste works great here w/ all apps... select w/ left mouse button and paste w/ the middle one" is an example of what we pride ourselves of not doing: sweeping problems under the rug instead of fixing them. --
I don't think the previous poster was talking about GPL vs. commercial licenses, but about GPL versus less restrictive licenses, the idea being "if I paid for this with my tax dollars, I should be able to use it in my commercial products as well as in my free products".
I don't think that would necessarily be a better or more "fair" way to do it, however. Imagine you're in the business of selling GIS systems. You've funded a great deal of research and development to make this software component and all of a sudden, the government releases a similar component and allows anyone to make a product that competes with yours at a much lower cost than you had to expend.
Random hackers releasing the same code into the public domain would hurt you just as much, but at least they weren't paid by the government. --
Well, have fun laughing at Robert A. Heinlein's grave then. I chose the word because it means precisely what I wanted to say. What's wrong with that? --
Perhaps I'm giving the US legislature too much credit, but I won't believe that "failing" to take action agains this kind of use of a trademark (it's a conversation, not a publication -- that it was logged on the web doesn't change that) could possibly loosen the trademark holder's grip on the mark.
I think what happened must be that this Isabelle Drewelow, who sent the cease and desist order, didn't understand the nature and intent of the web page she had found by typing "for dummies" in the AltaVista search field. She must have though there was genuine trademark infringement going on.
The best course of action would be to respond calmly, politely and informatively (even dropping the sarcasm). Not everyone who doesn't grok the 'net deserves our ridicule. (Whether such people should be cruising it in search of trademark violations is another matter.) --
The Oracle CEO also staunchly defended his company's first foray into network computers--the Oracle brainchild formerly dubbed Network Computer Inc., which was roundly criticized as a failure. But the company changed its name to Liberate in May and went public in July. Now, according to Ellison, the company is worth almost $3 billion.
"If every bad idea I have comes back with $3 billion, I've got to keep rolling them out," he quipped. --
Slashdot Mirror
The only point we don't agree on is whether to see this as a battle to keep a possession or as a matter of justice.
--
"Dodge this!"
--
The things I do regret all belong to the same class: caving in when I should have stood up for what I believe in. Therefore, I would urge ttyp0 to consider not only what the present looks like now, but also how it's going to look seen from the future. Are you going to be able to look back and say you did the right thing? Perhaps more importantly: will you care? It all depends on what kind of person you are.
--
Alternatively, paste the URL leftmost in the Location field and press Ctrl-K to kill to eol, which gets rid of the old url (the cursor will be in the right place).
Note that I'm absolutely not trying to downplay the problems with Linux's "select'n'paste" method.
--
This has even less to do with the curreny discussion, but the plasma rifle is back in Quake 3 and quite possibly, when this poster said Quake, he meant Quake 3 just like when I say Quake, I actually mean Quake 2.
--
Are you the guy who makes all these really strange fortunes? :-)
--
But hey, at least you've implemented something that helps. I can't say the same about myself and my proposed method, which is:
Reject mail from unknown senders and mail back instructions on how to become a known sender. Those are simple and involve resending the mail with something added or replying to the reject notice. It isn't meant to be cracker proof, it's just to eliminate mass mailers.
I haven't done this because I don't want to annoy my correspondents, but if spam starts to annoy me too much (I actually don't get much spam), then I'll figure having each person jump through one hoop to email me isn't that big a cost.
--
If a company tries to sell a Slashdotter a closed-source encryption package, it doesn't get very far. The reader knows that if the package has holes that could be exploited by reading the source code, then the package has holes that can be exploited by reading a disassembly.
Why can't the /. readership apply the same logic to d.net as they apply to everything else? Is d.net somehow excempt?
If you couldn't be "confident in the return packets" if the full client source were released, then the only way you can be confident now is if you're deluding yourself.
I'll probably get flamed just like the last time I dared voice a negative opinion about d.net, but fuck it. If you're inconsistent while flaming me, the flames only make me stronger.
To prevent misunderstandings, let me state the nature of the holes I'm talking about. I'm not talking about running the d.net client compromising my security by it sending my passwd file to d.net or something like that. I'm talking about vulnerabilities that destroy our confidence in the results of the key tests.
Perhaps I just have the wrong take on the whole thing. I've been viewing d.net as an experiment and exercise in making trustworthy machines out of a mix of trustworthy and untrustworthy parts. But I believe this is one of the goals of the d.net project and that I'm not just pulling this out of my ass. It is not true that the d.net system is just a system for collecting a $10,000 prize and proving the need for longer keys to the US govt, whichever haphazard gum-and-shoestring method it takes.
I'm with grandma on this one: If you can't do it properly, you might as well not do it.
--
I think you're wrong. I can only speak for myself, but I don't care all that much about Linux per se. I care about the freedom and quality of the software. Any OS that provides an acceptable level of both will do. But if Linux becomes mainstream, the mainstream OS will be free and high-quality, so why not stay in the maintream?
Well, actually, I can imagine a reason: revolutionary advances in OS design. If a large body of Linux users, from home users to businesses to governments depends on Linux as it was at some point in time, it'll be difficult for Linux to incorporate revolutionary ideas and shed backward compatibility. Then again, I can just as easily imagine such backward-incompatible changes being made in one branch of the kernel and an old branch being maintained forever to support legacy apps.
--
All ISP terms of use documents I've seen allow the ISP to nuke your site if there's even a suggestion that it violates copyright.
--
This is probably all a misunderstanding. I interpreted "I find it really weird that you believe radiation in the brain might not cause memory loss, but yet you believe that adding milk will." as "I find it really weird that you believe radiation in the brain could not cause memory loss, but yet you believe that adding milk will."
--
Certainly. However, you attributed to ddwalker some beliefs that he did not state, but could be inferred from what he said by an invalid, but commonly used, form of reasoning.
--
I find it really weird that when someone questions the methods used in a study, they are often accused of believing the opposite of what the study's results show.
--
People should know that there was a security flaw, even if they only hear about it after it's been fixed. You could even say that it's *more* important to spread the word about a company's feeble security measures than it is to plug the hole because it decreases the chances that people will trust the company in the future and if this happens a lot, people shouldn't trust the comany. If reports about the hole only come out after it's fixed, then there aren't any sensational news items and there isn't any public outcry against and mockery of the company involved. This means that a compny that may well deserve to look bad avoids much of the fallout.
That is, you could say that if it hadn't been shown over and over again that laughable security practices never really hurt the company responsible even when they are exposed.
--
The opposite of the verb "win" is "lose" (with just one "o"). "Loose" is an adjective meaning the opposite of "tight".
--
- It crashes a lot for a lot of people (yeah, I know it runs ok for some people; that's not enough)
- The back button usually doesn't take you to the right part of the page. This has caused me to develop a strange browsing style that relies heavily on "open link in new window".
- After selecting from a drop-down box, it won't accept keystrokes until you focus on another window and then on netscape again.
These are real problems and I consider them big ones because they annoy the hell out of me. There are other annoyances, but they're minor. If these three things were cleared up, I'd consider netscape a decent browser. I define a decent product as one that doesn't necessarily impress me, but does what it claims to without annoying me.--
Anyway, what I really want is a realtime mpeg1/2 encoding solution that works in linux so that I can make my own TiVo-type thing.
--
Now, I've finally found a working url to q3test 1.08. I've used "copy link location" in Netscape's rmb menu to get the url into the clipboard and I'm going to paste it into a wget command line. Now, I'm going to be doing some X development and I'm afraid I'm going to crash X so I'll need to run wget under nohup in an xterm or in the console. I want to watch the download progress so I'll do it in the console. CTRL-ALT-F3, type "wget ", middle click. What happens? Some shit I selected in the console earlier and contains a load of newlines is pasted, causing wget to try download some garbage and the string "rm -rf /" (that happened to be leftmost on the screen in the garbage I had pasted earlier (presumably a copy of some haX0r digest)) to be executed as a command.
Fortunately I'm not one of those lesser beings that do everything as root.
Incidentally, the reason I'd selected that block of text is that I wanted to paste it into jed, running in another console. Guess what. That didn't work either!
BTW, what are the universal cut, copy, and paste keypresses that work in almost all programs, X or console? What is the ubiquitous method of selecting text with the keyboard?
"Cut and paste works great here w/ all apps... select w/ left mouse button and paste w/ the middle one" is an example of what we pride ourselves of not doing: sweeping problems under the rug instead of fixing them.
--
I'm mildly intrigued. Could you explain?
--
I don't think that would necessarily be a better or more "fair" way to do it, however. Imagine you're in the business of selling GIS systems. You've funded a great deal of research and development to make this software component and all of a sudden, the government releases a similar component and allows anyone to make a product that competes with yours at a much lower cost than you had to expend.
Random hackers releasing the same code into the public domain would hurt you just as much, but at least they weren't paid by the government.
--
I'm glad to hear the lack of privacy is lessening.
--
Well, have fun laughing at Robert A. Heinlein's grave then. I chose the word because it means precisely what I wanted to say. What's wrong with that?
--
I think what happened must be that this Isabelle Drewelow, who sent the cease and desist order, didn't understand the nature and intent of the web page she had found by typing "for dummies" in the AltaVista search field. She must have though there was genuine trademark infringement going on.
The best course of action would be to respond calmly, politely and informatively (even dropping the sarcasm). Not everyone who doesn't grok the 'net deserves our ridicule. (Whether such people should be cruising it in search of trademark violations is another matter.)
--
"If every bad idea I have comes back with $3 billion, I've got to keep rolling them out," he quipped.
--
I think you'd miss the tactile feedback to your button presses.
--